On
February 15, 2018, appellant Farrin B. Enterzari-Ullah
("Ullah") filed a notice of appeal in this case.
Dkt. 1. The next day, she filed an emergency motion seeking
reversal of an order dated February 13, 2018 by the Honorable
Shelley C. Chapman, United States Bankruptcy Judge.
See Dkt. 2 ("Emergency Mot."). That order,
which dismissed Ullah's fourth successive bankruptcy
petition as made in bad faith and barred Ullah from filing
successive such petitions, effectively cleared the way for
the sale on February 21, 2018 of Ullah's condominium
unit. On February 20, 2018, appellee the Columbia Condominium
(the "Condominium") filed a letter response urging
denial of the motion. Dkt. 3 ("Response"). For the
reasons that follow, Ullah's emergency motion is denied.

I.
Background

This
bankruptcy cases arises out of a lien held by the Condominium
on Ullah's condominium unit resulting from Ullah's
failure to pay common charges. On October 6, 2015, Ullah
filed for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code.
See In re Farrin Ullah, Bankr. S.D.N.Y. No. 15-12737
(SCC), Dkt. 1. During those proceedings, the Condominium
filed, and the Bankruptcy Court granted, a motion for relief
from the automatic stay. See id., Dkts. 36, 51.

On May
16, 2016, Ullah filed a Chapter 7 case arising from the same
foreclosure, also before Judge Chapman. See In re Farrin
B. Enterzari-Ullah, Bankr. S.D.N.Y. No. 16-11416 (SCC),
Dkt. 1. Ullah's initial, Chapter 11 bankruptcy case was
still pending. On June 14, 2016, the Bankruptcy Court
dismissed the Chapter 7 case, construed the petition as a
motion to convert the pending Chapter 11 case to a Chapter 7
case, and granted the motion to convert. See id.,
Dkt. 23. Ullah thereupon withdrew the original petition, as
converted, and Judge Chapman dismissed the case. See
No. 15-12737, Dkt. 70.

On July
26, 2017, Ullah filed yet another bankruptcy petition, her
third, arising from the same foreclosure. See In re
Farrin (Batool) Enterzari-Ullah, Bankr. S.D.N.Y. No.
17-12053 (SCC), Dkt. 1. This petition, brought under Chapter
11 and also before Judge Chapman, remains pending. In
connection with this matter, as with the two before, the
Condominium filed a motion for relief from the automatic stay
so as to permit the sale of Ullah's condominium to go
forward. See id., Dkt. 14. On October 27, 2017, the
Bankruptcy Court granted the motion. See id., Dkt.
26. On November 13, 2017, Ullah filed a notice of appeal.
See id., Dkt. 31. On January 17, 2018, the
Bankruptcy Court entered an order denying Ullah's motion
for a stay pending appeal. See id., Dkt. 42.

On
January 22, 2018, in connection with her third petition
(i.e., in the 17-12053 matter), Ullah filed an
emergency motion in the United States District Court to
reverse Judge Chapman's order lifting the automatic stay.
See In re Farrin (Batool) Enterzari-Ullah, S.D.N.Y.
No. 17-cv-8971 (PGG), Dkt. 7. On January 24, 2018, Judge
Gardephe denied that motion on the ground that the notice of
appeal had not been timely filed. See id., Dkt. 12.
Judge Gardephe therefore directed the Clerk of Court to close
the case. See Id. at 5. On February 12, 2018, Ullah
moved for reconsideration. See id., Dkt. 14. On
February 15, 2018, Judge Gardephe denied the motion for
reconsideration. See id., Dkt. 16.

Consistent
with the Bankruptcy Court's repeated liftings of the
automatic stay attendant to Ullah's petitions, the
Condominium scheduled a foreclosure sale for Ullah's unit
for January 24, 2018. See In re Farrin (Batool)
Enterzari-Ullah, Bankr. S.D.N.Y. No. 18-10160 (SCC),
Dkt. 7-1 at 4; id, Dkt. 10 at 3. That day, January
24, 2018, with the 17-12053 bankruptcy case still pending,
Ullah filed a fourth petition-the Chapter 7 petition from
which this appeal is taken. See Bankr. S.D.N.Y. No.
18-10160 (SCC), Dkt. 1 (the "18-10160 Petition").
On January 25, 2018, the Condominium moved to dismiss the
18-10160 Petition for abuse pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §
707(b). It argued that the petition, Ullah's fourth, was
"an obvious attempt to circumvent [the Bankruptcy
Court's] orders, and frustrate the Condominium's
attempts to foreclose." See id., Dkt. 7 at 2.
On January 30, 2018, Ullah filed an opposition. See
id, Dkt. 10.

On
February 13, 2018, Judge Chapman dismissed the fourth
petition as having been filed in bad faith. She reasoned,
first, that "all interested parties [were] afforded an
opportunity to be heard"; second, that Ullah's
Chapter 11 case was still pending; and third, that Ullah
filed the instant bankruptcy case "solely to trigger a
new automatic stay to stop a foreclosure sale that was
scheduled for January 24, 2018." Id., Dkt. 12
at 1 (the "Order"). Judge Chapman further enjoined
Ullah from commencing a voluntary case under any chapter of
the Bankruptcy Code, in any jurisdiction, for 180 days
following issuance of the order. Order at 2.

On
February 15, 2018, Ullah filed a notice of appeal to this
Court. See id., Dkt. 13. The next day, Ullah filed
an emergency motion to reverse Judge Chapman's February
13, 2018 order. As the ground for the motion, she stated that
the Bankruptcy Court had "made its decision without
considering [Ullah's] reply opposition." Emergency
Mot. at 1. Ullah's motion was made on an emergency basis
because her apartment is scheduled to be sold at auction on
February 21, 2018. Id. at 4-5. Ullah claims that
this auction is unlawful, as the Condominium failed to give
three weeks' public notice as required by law.
Id. at 4.

II.
Discussion

The
Court denies Ullah's emergency motion on both procedural
and substantive grounds.

As to
procedural deficiencies: Ullah's motion seeks to
"reverse Judge Chapman's order dated February 13,
2018." Emergency Mot. at l.[1] But to grant such relief-
i.e., to revive Ullah's fourth bankruptcy action
as potentially meritorious-the Court would require a complete
record and briefing. See Bankr. R. 8006, 8009. Given
the press of time, the Condominium has not had a full
opportunity to develop its arguments for affirmance.
Moreover, to the extent that Ullah recasts the relief she
seeks as a request that this Court intervene to stay the
auction scheduled for February 21, 2018, see
Emergency Mot. at 4-5, Ullah effectively asks the Court to
vitiate Judge Gardephe's and Judge Chapman's orders
in the third petition, as well as Judge Chapman's order
in the fourth, so as to re-impose the automatic stays that
Judge Chapman held were properly lifted. Ullah does not,
however, appeal Judge Gardephe's ruling dismissing her
appeal. The Court will not permit Ullah to end-run this
proper procedure.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;As to
substantive deficiencies: Assuming arguendo that the
Court may reverse Judge Chapman's Order without the
benefit of full briefing and an appellate record, Ullah's
motion is substantively without merit. The Court has taken
judicial notice of the proceedings underlying this bankruptcy
...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.